Re: [Mip4] draft-ietf-mip4-gen-ext-03.txt

[Henrik Levkowetz <henrik at levkowetz.com>]

Hi Ralph and all,

I have only one small comment regarding Pete's excellent
exposition, inline below:

On 2007-11-15 21:24 McCann Peter-A001034 said the following:
> Hi, Ralph,
...

> When reverse tunneling ala RFC 3024 is used (as it is in most 
> major deployments of MIP), the MN has a choice about whether
> to negotiate "encapsulated delivery style" on the last hop
> link.  It must negotiate this if it wants to send broadcast
> datagrams (of which I think the DHCPDISCOVER is one) to the
> home network.  In this case, an FA will look at each packet,
> and reverse tunnel the ones that are so encapsulated and send
> other packets directly.  The problem I was trying to point 
> out is that this extra encapsulation would be present on 
> every packet sent to the home network, which might cause
> a lot of overhead on the link between the MN and FA.  If
> this is a wireless link, this overhead is especially onerous.

Note, though, that there is currently a proposal in 
draft-chakrabarti-mip4-mcbc-01 which if pursued will remove
the extra encapsulation on all packets:
  http://www.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chakrabarti-mip4-mcbc-01

> Please post if you have any remaining questions or if I 
> have misunderstood the DHCP message flow.


Regards,

	Henrik


-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/